Glock, 200 rounds. Kahr, 500. Revolver, 1.
This is a discussion on When do you trust it for carry? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I just bought a G26 a couple weeks ago and finally had a chance to get to the range yesterday. I randomly loaded up the ...
I just bought a G26 a couple weeks ago and finally had a chance to get to the range yesterday. I randomly loaded up the first magazine with an assortment of ammo, two kinds of hollow points and two kinds of ball. I pulled the trigger, gun went bang, and failed to feed the next round. So I'm thinking to myself, "Well this is awesome!" I cleared the malfunction and ran through the rest of the mag. The rest of the session, 300 rounds worth, went off without a hitch using a 10 rd mag, two 17 round mags, and a 33 round mag. All in all I used Gold Dots and Critical Defense in HP and PMC, Blazer, and Lawman in ball. If memory serves, the misfeed was a Critical Defense round.
How many more would you put down range, if any, before calling it good?
Glock, 200 rounds. Kahr, 500. Revolver, 1.
I suggest that you don't mix up your ammo when you're testing. You need to know what's not working and what is. Sometimes the problem is the gun, sometimes it's the ammo. Right now you really don't know what's what.
That being said a couple hundred rounds out of a Glock should be enough. Make sure you shoot what you are gonna carry!
200-400 rounds depending on the gun.
Have Fun and Shoot Straight !!
Mixing ammunition in one magazine is a bad idea. If you do have a malfunction you won't know if it'd due to a feeding problem of brand "A" or an extraction problem from brand "B". Stick with a brand that has a good track record such as the Speer Gold Dot and pick two or three magazines that you will dedicate to only carry and run a hundred plus through the gun using each mag 3 or 4 times.
If you have more than one brand of ammo that passes, pick the one that you are most accurate with and if there is not a noticeable difference in accuracy, go with the one that has the best history in the field and availability.
As a side note, the Critical Defense has had instances of feed problems due to the plug in the hollow point jamming on some autos feed ramps. It hasn't had a real long field history or usage by LE to be able to make a decision for sure from what I can tell.
200 rounds is fine. Your gun has fired 300 without a hitch. You are good to go.
Anything mechanical can fail at any time. A well proven pistol with 5000 rounds of defensive ammo through it can fail on round #5001. Even with the Gen 4 problems, you don't really hear complaints about the subcompact models from Glock.
Was your failure to feed from a 17 round or 33 round mag? Sometimes, grip pressure on the longer mags can move the mag just enough to cause feeding problems in the subcompact Glocks. Although the bigger mags will work with the G26, you should stick to the G26 mags for carry, using the longer mags for backup or range use.
Slow is smooth.....smooth is fast.
You pretty much dared it to jam by mixing the very first rounds that it shoots.
Any new gun is a little stiff. In addition to cleaning a new Glock before shooting it, I'll rack the slide 50 times or so. Then the first 100 rnds are always fmj. Once it's feeding like a champ, I'll run my carry rounds through it (Gold Dot jhp), and then it goes in the carry rotation.
In any case, you should be good to go now.
You Can Also Find Me On Personal Defense Forum Dot Com
Just as my humble opinion, I've never bought a production gun of any brand or type that didn't need a considerable amount of TLC to smooth rough edges and tune the action. While firing a number of rounds through a new gun to "break it in" does a bit of natural smoothing and deburring to make everything work a litte smoother and more dependably, it seldom gets everything or does the wear-in process in a perfectly uniform manner. Naturally, there's a lot more things to potentially go wrong from rough spots and machine grooves in a SA than a revolver; and unlike a revolver, the type, quality, and bullet style of the ammunition plays a critical role in the dependability of a SA.
If you consider the cost of 500 to 1000 rounds of ammunition necessary for a so-so "wear-in" process of a new gun, there's not much more cost involved with taking it to a reputable gunsmith for a professional tune-up that will completely bypass the need for break-in and leave you with a silky smooth end result that's considerably more dependable than all the natural wear-in can ever do. While I'm probably as "handgun poor" as many here, I don't pick a "handgun of the day" to carry; instead, I trust my life to the dependability of of only two SA's (and four magazines for each one) that have been completely worked over by a reputable gunsmith. The triggers on both are smooth as glass, barrel chamber's internal opening chamfer (bevel) is rounded, polished and free of any tiny ridges or machine marks, the feed ramps are so polished that you can see the cracks between your teeth in them, all action parts and slide rails have had the edges and surfaces smoothed like glass, magazines have been disassembled with all ridges and rough edges smoothed and rounded on the follower and around magazine opening and clip fingers. After that, there was no "break in" needed, and the difference in operation and performance was unbelievable.
Even with a well-tuned SA, you still must be very careful about the ammunition you select because it can often be a major source of things you don't want going wrong in a potential self-defense situation. Cheap ammo is fine for plinking, but you'll notice that much of it will have a relatively sharp and pronounced edge around the bullet seating point from the chopped off end of the shell case that was never slightly bevelled and smoothed to remove the sharp ridge that can easily pose enough drag to cause a misfeed.
As already mentioned by others, try to avoid hollow-point bullet styles (regardless of price or hype) that have a considerable degree of taper toward the front and/or an excessively wide diameter hollow-point hole (whether it's filled or open) because they will both be more apt to cause a misfeed than a bullet with less taper, more rounded nose, and a smaller diameter hollow-point.
Everyone has their own standards.
For me, 600 rounds of practice ammo (ball) and 200 SD ammo, without cleaning, no failures and I consider it GTG.
"Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less".
General Robert E. Lee
Be sure to test fire all magazines when doing serviceability checks, as well. I found a damaged one I bought used, which failed to feed about halfway through the stack. It did the same thing in another gun, as well, and immediately got set aside from the carry gear.
I like 300 rounds without any failure of practice ammo followed by 50 rounds of self defense. I also use my handloaded JHPs and if they shoot them it is usually good to go. (Kimber 1911 . . . I have know idea if I would ever carry for SD)
Registration: A prelude to Confiscation and Anarchy.
As everyone has stated already I wouldn't mix the ammo in the mags. Now I usually run 300 to 500 through my pistols before I call it good. I have found tho that my Sig pistols are good to go out of the box, but I still run 200 through them the first time out.
2nd Amendment, the one that protects the rest!
It subjective and changes from person to person. As you have seen in the responses to your post, some feel many hundreds of rounds, other far less.
For me personally, once I have a good feel for the gun, that is, I know how I need to hold and manipulate the gun to get it to run reliably, and I know what type of hold will cause a malfunction, I feel the gun is learned. Then I concentrate on round count without a failure. And the golen number for me is around 300 or so. Maybe more depending on the manufacturer. For instance, with a Glock, 300 round with no failure is good to go. With my Kahr CW9 when I bought it, I felt it needed some extra testing as I have repeatedly heard that Kahrs can be finicky with feeding reliably. So I went between 500 and 600 rounds before I really felt confident with it, though I don't think now I needed to as I have yet to be able to get the gun to malfunction. With other makes, I might adjust the round count as I feel is needed.
I don't think there is a certain number of rounds that will prove the gun is reliable or not. Once the magazines are determined to be good and not causing any malfunctions, then it comes down to how the operator is manipulating and holding the gun that determines the guns reliability. An operator who limp wrists his gun is going to experience problems and may think his gun is a POS while another operator that maintains a good wrist lock and solid hold may have no problems at all with the same gun.
Thanks for all the replies. Didn't think about difficulty in troubleshooting with mixed ammo...was basically trying to give it an onslaught of choices and figured if it fed everything from one round to another without fail it'd be a good test. Don't know, probably doesn't mean anything but seemed like a good idea. Then again, hind sight has proven a lot of in the moment good ideas were in fact not.